Re: FF 3.6.9 update for F-13

On 09/21/2010 01:45 AM, Bojan Smojver wrote: > On Sun, 2010-09-12 at 17:50 +1000, Bojan Smojver wrote: >> Isn't that a security related >> update? > > Ping... > I'm working on it, recently it's delayed in rel-eng: https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/4125 -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fed

Heads Up - xulrunner 2.0 in rawhide (F15)

There's a new xulrunner/firefox in rawhide. The API (js too) is slightly incompatible with the 1.9.2, there is a new XPCOM modules registration and so on, see: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=634596#c3 https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Firefox_4_for_developers https://developer.mozill

Re: xulrunner 2.0 in rawhide (F15) bundles several system libs

On 10/04/2010 10:24 AM, Peter Lemenkov wrote: > Anyway, the situation is worser then people believe, because no matter > how many maintainers MoFo apps have in Fedora - they just can't fix > bugs and close tickets, even ones with clean and sane patches > attached. Unfortunately you forget to attac

Re: xulrunner 2.0 in rawhide (F15) bundles several system libs

On 10/04/2010 10:50 AM, Peter Lemenkov wrote: > 2010/10/4 Martin Stransky: >> On 10/04/2010 10:24 AM, Peter Lemenkov wrote: >>> Anyway, the situation is worser then people believe, because no matter >>> how many maintainers MoFo apps have in Fedora - they just can'

Re: xulrunner 2.0 in rawhide (F15) bundles several system libs

On 09/30/2010 08:54 PM, Sven Lankes wrote: > 2. The combination of the Mozilla Trademark issue combined with the > strict handling of patches by (corporate|distro)-maintainers (I don't > think that this is a RH/Fedora issue - same with Canonical/Ubuntu) > makes me feel uneasy about ff b

Heads Up - New Firefox update

Hi, there's a new Firefox update waiting in Bodhi and we can't push it to stable because of new rules. We recommend you to update to it ASAP as it fixes a public critical 0day vulnerability (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=607222). Bodhi links: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/upda

Seeking for package review - Berusky 2 game

Hi, Berusky2 is a 3D sequel of Berusky and former commercial project: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=732200 project homepage: http://anakreon.cz/en/Berusky2.htm I promise the spec file is tinny and reviewer friendly :) Thnaks, ma. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.o

Heads up - firefox desktop file change

Firefox desktop file name has been changed in rawhide, from mozilla-firefox.desktop to firefox.desktop. See bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=736558. ma. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: Packaging a Firefox extension

On 10/30/2011 06:37 PM, Ville-Pekka Vainio wrote: > Hi, > > I'm maintaining the Finnish spell checking extension for Firefox called > Mozvoikko. Upstream recently released a Javascript-based version of the > extension, which I've now packaged in Rawhide. Spec file here: >

Re: GNOME 3 Fallback Mode

On 04/27/2011 03:10 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: > Lots of things are unfortunate. This is software, after all. I regret > not working on this earlier, since it would probably have saved the > effort invested in fallback mode entirely. I think the fallback mode is a great idea, not everyone is excite

Re: Firefox 5 for Fedora 15?

On 06/22/2011 10:56 PM, Nathanael D. Noblet wrote: > On 06/22/2011 02:55 PM, Heiko Adams wrote: >> Hi, >> will Fedora 15's version of Firefox (currently 4.0.1) be updated to >> Firefox 5? >> >> The following koji builds let me asume it: >> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=249788

Re: [SECURITY] Fedora 13 Update: xulrunner-1.9.2.3-1.fc13

On 04/10/2010 01:47 AM, Yanko Kaneti wrote: > Thank you for breaking every explicit gecko-libs dependency out there in > a branch close to release. :/ > > You know gecko-libs provides/requires are there exactly to avoid this > sort of thing, right? Both callion and xhorak can probably share some >

Re: F-13 xulrunner/firefox security update: need to rebuild dependents

Thanks. I've submitted missing packages here: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/Miro-3.0-2.fc13,mozvoikko-1.0-10.fc13,galeon-2.0.7-28.fc13,gnome-web-photo-0.9-8.fc13,gnome-python2-extras-2.25.3-18.fc13 On 04/10/2010 02:51 AM, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote: > On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 1:18 AM,

Re: Thunderbird bz 579023 still not fixed even though there is an upstream fix available

Hi, we're patching mozilla packages only for really critical issues because of mozilla trademarks. We can't put any patch we want to the mozilla package and ship it as 'Firefox' or 'Thunderbird'. I've asked for inclusion at upstream bug, https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=550455, if y

Re: Thunderbird bz 579023 still not fixed even though there is an upstream fix available

On 04/23/2010 09:18 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On 04/23/2010 09:03 AM, Martin Stransky wrote: >> Hi, >> >> we're patching mozilla packages only for really critical issues because >> of mozilla trademarks. We can't put any patch we want to the mozilla &

Re: Thunderbird bz 579023 still not fixed even though there is an upstream fix available

On 04/23/2010 09:30 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > On 04/23/2010 12:33 PM, Martin Stransky wrote: >> Hi, >> >> we're patching mozilla packages only for really critical issues because >> of mozilla trademarks. We can't put any patch we want to the mozilla &

Re: Thunderbird bz 579023 still not fixed even though there is an upstream fix available

On 04/23/2010 11:11 AM, Michal Hlavinka wrote: > On Friday 23 of April 2010 09:03:37 Martin Stransky wrote: >> Hi, >> >> we're patching mozilla packages only for really critical issues because >> of mozilla trademarks. We can't put any patch we want to

Re: playing flash regression in f13-beta

On 04/24/2010 12:13 PM, Luming Yu wrote: > Hi there, > > I came across a really weird problem with flash player on playing > these video on http://video.nationalgeographic.com/video/index.html > > For those featured videos like Bacteria-size Babies Among Ocean's Smallest > Life: > Linux (f12) i686

Re: F17 Alpha and VMWare Fusion

Try i686 iso, the x86_64 is broken. On 03/06/2012 03:43 PM, Mark Bidewell wrote: Last night I attempted an install of F17 Alpha on VMWare Fusion. 1) My first attempt was using the install DVD. I was redirected into a text installer, I was not prompted to select packages. The resulting install

Firefox testing - offscreen surfaces and OMTC

Folks, I'd use some testing for new Firefox feature - offscreen surfaces [1]. It may also fix crashes when OMTC is enabled [2]. Browser should be a bit faster with those features on. How to test? - Install Firefox 40 on Fedora 22,23,Rawhide (you'd need Gtk3 build) - go to about:config, click

Re: Firefox testing - offscreen surfaces and OMTC

I see the same flickering on NVIDIA hardware. Intel seems to be fine. On 08/21/2015 03:06 PM, Alexander Ploumistos wrote: On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 11:33 AM, Martin Stransky wrote: - Install Firefox 40 on Fedora 22,23,Rawhide (you'd need Gtk3 build) - go to about:config, click to any ke

Re: Firefox testing - offscreen surfaces and OMTC

On 08/21/2015 03:34 PM, Alexander Ploumistos wrote: On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 4:24 PM, Martin Stransky wrote: I see the same flickering on NVIDIA hardware. Intel seems to be fine. Which model? Is it using one of the older driver series? It's GeForce GTX 750 with nvidia binary driver

Re: Firefox testing - offscreen surfaces and OMTC

h has been patched but not made it to release yet: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=84252 What do you mean here by "acceleration"? The offscreen surfaces referenced in this post are CPU rendering. ma. On 08/21/2015 01:33 AM, Martin Stransky wrote: Folks, I'd use

Re: Firefox testing - offscreen surfaces and OMTC

On 08/24/2015 09:43 AM, drago01 wrote: On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 8:54 AM, Martin Stransky wrote: On 08/21/2015 08:28 PM, Thomas Daede wrote: I've been running nightly with this enabled for quite a while on Intel and it's been fine. Note that OMTC is required for e10s. If you me

Re: Firefox testing - offscreen surfaces and OMTC

On 08/24/2015 10:41 AM, drago01 wrote: On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 10:18 AM, Martin Stransky wrote: On 08/24/2015 09:43 AM, drago01 wrote: On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 8:54 AM, Martin Stransky wrote: On 08/21/2015 08:28 PM, Thomas Daede wrote: I've been running nightly with this enable

Re: Firefox testing - offscreen surfaces and OMTC

On 08/25/2015 12:09 PM, Kamil Paral wrote: I'm seeing flickering (e.g. with arstechnica) on 01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. [AMD/ATI] RV620/M82 [Mobility Radeon HD 3450/3470] with native drivers (F22). I have seen heavy flickering on mapy.cz (online maps) when

Re: Firefox addon signing

On 08/27/2015 04:40 PM, Alexander Ploumistos wrote: Aren't the addons that we ship in fedora a bunch of text files zipped in an xpi archive? It is kind of awkward to send them back and forth, but if there are no other binaries, does it go against a particular policy? Or we could decide that we t

Re: Firefox addon signing

On 08/28/2015 11:00 AM, Alexander Ploumistos wrote: On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 10:18 AM, Martin Stransky wrote: Can we ship addons which are already signed by Mozilla? Or does Fedora packager modify them somehow? It seems that even when the source is an xpi file, rpm treats it like any other

Re: Firefox addon signing

On 08/28/2015 11:40 AM, Emmanuel Seyman wrote: * Martin Stransky [28/08/2015 11:24] : Thanks for the info. Actually is there any reason why Fedora packager would need to modify the original extension? If there is a security issue with an extension, the packager might well want to distribute

Re: Firefox addon signing

On 08/28/2015 11:34 AM, Alexander Ploumistos wrote: On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Martin Stransky wrote: Thanks for the info. Actually is there any reason why Fedora packager would need to modify the original extension? That depends on the extension and its particulars. For example

Re: Firefox Gtk3 test package

On 09/03/2014 09:58 AM, Kẏra wrote: Testing has been great! I still really appreciate this repo. There have been a few firefox releases plus Fedora 21 is no longer rawhide so that could use its own repo. Any plans to update soon? I've been able to find these two bugs (though I haven't been able

Re: Bodhi-Problem? -> Firefox 32 / Thunderbird 31.1

On 09/08/2014 08:32 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: On Sun, 2014-09-07 at 12:17 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: 0) The autoqa note above. The maintainer could override that and push to testing. 2) F21 is currently in Alpha freeze. Only updates that fix accepted blockers or freeze exceptions go to stabl

Re: Firefox Gtk3 test package

. On 01/13/2014 04:15 PM, Martin Stransky wrote: Hi guys, first $SUBJ is available at: http://stransky.fedorapeople.org/FirefoxGtk3/ It's just a src.spm and plugin support it not finished (don't browse youtube ;-)) but may work as a preview. I'll provide Fedora builds and repo l

Re: Firefox Gtk3 test package

IMO It would be great if anyone can step in, rebuild the gtk3 package for other Fedora's and maintain the copr repo. I can help with any issues with that so feel free to ask. ma. On 11/04/2014 12:37 PM, Martin Stransky wrote: The Gtk3 Firefox is enabled for master (Fedora 22) now. If

Re: Join to Mozilla Location Service in Fedora

On 11/06/2014 03:18 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote: - Original Message - Hi Folks, as you may know [0] Firefox in Fedora [1] is using Mozilla Location service [2] as a location provider instead of the Google one. I'd like to ask you to join the project, install the Mozilla Stumbler applica

Join to Mozilla Location Service in Fedora

Hi Folks, as you may know [0] Firefox in Fedora [1] is using Mozilla Location service [2] as a location provider instead of the Google one. I'd like to ask you to join the project, install the Mozilla Stumbler application [3] and help to improve the location accuracy. Thanks! ma. p.s.: Yes

FYI: Firefox - No more binary components in extensions

Forwarded Message Subject: No more binary components in extensions Date: Mon, 4 May 2015 11:03:12 -0400 From: Benjamin Smedberg Reply-To: dev-extensi...@lists.mozilla.org To: dev-platform , Firefox Dev , dev-extensi...@lists.mozilla.org (Followup questions or comments to moz

Rapid release for security updates

Hi guys, is there any mechanism how to speed up release of critical security fixes by Fedora update system? For instance Firefox packages are released *week* after official Mozilla release which is really bad. Any idea here? ma. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://a

Re: Rapid release for security updates

On 05/19/2015 03:17 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote: On 05/19/2015 04:12 AM, drago01 wrote: Why does it take so long? Most firefox uipdates get enough karma before they end up in testing. In that case they should be picked up by the next push (which is still a manual process afaik; so no idea how

Re: Rapid release for security updates

On 05/19/2015 11:12 AM, drago01 wrote: On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 10:38 AM, Martin Stransky wrote: Hi guys, is there any mechanism how to speed up release of critical security fixes by Fedora update system? For instance Firefox packages are released *week* after official Mozilla release which

Re: advertisement in packaged software (e.g. Firefox)

From the original post at [1]: "Directory Tiles will instead suggest pre-packaged content for first-time users. Some of these tile placements will be from the Mozilla ecosystem, some will be popular websites in a given geographic location, and some will be sponsored content from hand-picked

Re: Firefox Gtk3 test package

On 03/28/2014 11:44 AM, Kẏra wrote: First off, thank you so much for this! I have been using it and it is stunning. The difference is huge. Thanks! It also seems to be the only browser that has supported my HiDPI display (perhaps that's thanks to gtk3?). That's a great news, I was not aware

Re: Firefox 29.0.1

Why do you think it's fixed in 29.0.1? I see only some Android and network fixes there (http://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-release/). ma. On 05/13/2014 11:34 PM, Bojan Smojver wrote: Could someone please build that. The blank PDF print thing is a bit annoying with 29. Thanks, -- devel

Re: Firefox 29.0.1

On 05/14/2014 10:20 AM, Bojan Smojver wrote: On Wed, 2014-05-14 at 08:59 +0200, Martin Stransky wrote: Why do you think it's fixed in 29.0.1? I see only some Android and network fixes there (http://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-release/). http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/2

Re: Firefox 29.0.1

On 05/14/2014 12:37 PM, Bojan Smojver wrote: On May 14, 2014 7:57:25 PM GMT+10:00, Martin Stransky wrote: The release notes are wrong, the patch is not applied in 29.0.1 but only in an upcoming Firefox 30. Sure works in Windows with 29.0.1. Actually it works because of backout bug 991767

Re: Firefox Gtk3 test package

On 06/09/2014 09:04 PM, Kẏra wrote: On that note, I haven't seen a new build in a while! When can we hope for an update? There are some patches waiting upstream for review so when those are done. I'd like also update the firefox-gtk3 build to Firefox 31. cool! can you link to bugs / review p

Retired - nspluginwrapper

Hi Folks, I'm going to retire and remove nspluginwrapper from Fedora 24 and newer [1]. Firefox and Chromium does not use that any more. Please speak up if you need that. ma. [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1289053 -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lis

Xulrunner - intent to remove from Fedora 24

Hi, does anyone use the xulrunner package? (and gecko-devel actually). Mozilla does not maintain it any more and the XUL as technology is going to be removed/deprecated. I'd like to remove the package from Fedora 24. ma. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedorap

Re: Xulrunner - intent to remove from Fedora 24

On 01/26/2016 06:48 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: On 26 January 2016 at 10:18, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote: On 2016-01-26 08:55, Richard Hughes wrote: On 26 January 2016 at 12:51, Martin Stransky wrote: does anyone use the xulrunner package? (and gecko-devel actually). Mozilla does not

Re: Xulrunner - intent to remove from Fedora 24

On 01/28/2016 08:52 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote: On 01/27/2016 10:17 PM, Ben Rosser wrote: It's been a while since I've used it, but chatzilla appears to still under active development here: https://hg.mozilla.org/chatzilla/shortlog. Yes, it is still somewhat active. I am one of the upstream develo

Firefox - call for testing (Gtk3 effort)

Folks, we see many Gtk3 crashes in Firefox recently (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1239962) which comes from Gtk3 system library. If you's like to help here, please install latest FF updates from koji: F23: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-8344bd0b61 F22: ht

Re: Firefox - call for testing (Gtk3 effort)

Also please remove Firefox from ABRT blacklist at: /etc/abrt/abrt-action-save-package-data.conf ma. On 02/03/2016 10:43 AM, Martin Stransky wrote: Folks, we see many Gtk3 crashes in Firefox recently (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1239962) which comes from Gtk3 system library

Re: Firefox - call for testing (Gtk3 effort)

mes later after closing. Jakub On 02/03/2016 10:43 AM, Martin Stransky wrote: Folks, we see many Gtk3 crashes in Firefox recently (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1239962) which comes from Gtk3 system library. If you's like to help here, please install latest FF updates fr

Re: Firefox - call for testing (Gtk3 effort)

On 02/03/2016 02:45 PM, Jakub Jelen wrote: On 02/03/2016 10:53 AM, Martin Stransky wrote: Also please remove Firefox from ABRT blacklist at: /etc/abrt/abrt-action-save-package-data.conf ma. On 02/03/2016 10:43 AM, Martin Stransky wrote: Folks, we see many Gtk3 crashes in Firefox recently

Re: Firefox - call for testing (Gtk3 effort)

On 02/03/2016 05:08 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 03/02/16 11:58 +0100, Jakub Jelen wrote: Don't know it it will help, but I see Firefox almost always crash when I open new window and try to close it on F23. Sometimes earlier after opening the windows, sometimes later after closing. I've been

Firefox / Thunderbird 17 ESR for Fedora 16/17

Hi guys, as the subject says there are test packages available for your beloved Fedora's. Especially Thunderbird 17 (Earlybird now) needs some love from you (the 17ESR line is going to be a background for the future ones) so it would be great if you can install it, run it and report any issues

Re: Firefox / Thunderbird 17 ESR for Fedora 16/17

On 09/22/2012 01:02 PM, Julian Sikorski wrote: W dniu 21.09.2012 15:33, Martin Stransky pisze: Hi guys, as the subject says there are test packages available for your beloved Fedora's. Especially Thunderbird 17 (Earlybird now) needs some love from you (the 17ESR line is going to

Re: Firefox / Thunderbird 17 ESR for Fedora 16/17

On 09/24/2012 11:21 AM, Frank Murphy wrote: On 24/09/12 07:33, Martin Stransky wrote: https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/thunderbird-testers/2012-September/94.html - Thunderbird 17ESR may be the last release created by mozilla thunderbird developers, all next ones may be driven

Re: Firefox in Rawhide is out of date

Yes, that's it. But it looks like a rpm bug to me. Or we need to fix the nspr package to provide a correct modversion...no not a xulrunner/firefox issue after all. ma. On 27.6.2013 12:26, Sandro Mani wrote: The issue seems to be that the minimum-required nspr version in xulrunner is determine

Firefox on Wayland

Hi Folks, Firefox with native Wayland support is available here: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/stransky/firefox-wayland/ https://stransky.fedorapeople.org/firefox-47.0-6.wayland.fc25.src.rpm It's an official Fedora Firefox package (47.0) + Wayland patch and it replaces your distro FF

Re: Firefox on Wayland

, Jun 22, 2016 at 1:12 PM, Martin Stransky wrote: Hi Folks, Firefox with native Wayland support is available here: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/stransky/firefox-wayland/ https://stransky.fedorapeople.org/firefox-47.0-6.wayland.fc25.src.rpm It's an official Fedora Firefox pac

Re: Firefox on Wayland

On 06/28/2016 08:41 AM, Samuel Rakitničan wrote: I've failed to launch the application properly under X.org and Wayland using the launcher icon in GNOME shell. But when I switched to Wayland, I executed the `firefox` command from "Terminix" and it worked under XWayland with no regressions so far

Re: Firefox on Wayland

On 06/28/2016 12:13 PM, Martin Stransky wrote: On 06/28/2016 08:41 AM, Samuel Rakitničan wrote: I've failed to launch the application properly under X.org and Wayland using the launcher icon in GNOME shell. But when I switched to Wayland, I executed the `firefox` command from "Termin

Re: Firefox 48 v Electrolysis

I believe it's disabled by default, because upstream enables it specifically for safe instances (no/safe extensions and so) by mozilla installer which is disabled in Fedora. You can enable it by your own in about:config, set browser.tabs.remote.autostart value to true. Note: some extensions

Re: Mozilla enabled ads in Firefox and they're active in Fedora

Hi, It looks like the recent Firefox "Adds" does not break any Fedora rules so it's perfectly ok to ship it "as is". The H264 codec download feature break the Fedora law and has been removed from Fedora. When Fedora rules the Adds out of the apps it will be removed from FF immediately. Until

Re: Mozilla enabled ads in Firefox and they're active in Fedora

On 11/17/2014 02:15 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: Ralf Corsepius wrote: Well, how to put it ... Mozilla.com's role in fedora has many times been subject to controvercies, but doubts have always been ruled ;) They always get special exceptions for any and all Fedora policies that upstream does not wa

Re: Mozilla enabled ads in Firefox and they're active in Fedora

On 11/20/2014 03:28 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote: It's not about tracking per se – I'm fine with e.g. opt-in usage reports that feed into research for making a better browser – that benefits me (in a very indirect and miniscule way, but in the end the purpose is for the *user's* benefit). Ads are a fe

Re: Mozilla enabled ads in Firefox and they're active in Fedora

On 11/23/2014 05:50 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: The tiles are coming from Mozilla. So yes please explain how the advertisers can track me through them if I don't click them. Much depends on what's in the tile. For example an embedded 1 pixel transparent gif, commonly known as a "web bug", and

Re: Firefox webrtc support in F21?

Hi, the WebRTC needs the h264 CISCO codec which was disabled in Fedora Firefox, see: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155499 https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1359 If you'd like to use the WebRTC (and Mozilla Hello service) in Fedora Firefox, go to about:config and set those

Re: Firefox webrtc support in F21?

There's also a good page about it: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/OpenH264 ma. On 12/15/2014 09:12 AM, Martin Stransky wrote: Hi, the WebRTC needs the h264 CISCO codec which was disabled in Fedora Firefox, see: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155499 https://fedorahoste

Re: Firefox webrtc support in F21?

On 12/15/2014 10:29 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: On 12/15/2014 09:12 AM, Martin Stransky wrote: the WebRTC needs the h264 CISCO codec Are you sure? I've always assumed that Mozilla was more in the WebM/VP8 camp. Yes, I may be wrong here. But it seems to be necessary for the Mozilla

Re: Firefox webrtc support in F21?

On 12/15/2014 03:25 PM, drago01 wrote: On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 9:12 AM, Martin Stransky wrote: Hi, the WebRTC needs the h264 CISCO codec which was disabled in Fedora Firefox, see: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155499 https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1359 If you'd li

Re: firefox/vimeo

Please file a bug for that at bugzilla.redhat.com ma. On 01/12/2015 08:59 PM, Nikos Roussos wrote: I noticed that I'm unable to watch Vimeo videos with Firefox without Flash plugin. Same is not true if I use the Firefox build from upstream. Do we disable something on our build that may be respon

Flash plugin 0-day vulnerability in the wild

Folk, There's a live 0-day flash vulnerability which is not fixed yet [1][2]. If you use flash plugin I recommend you to enable the click-to-play mode for it. There's also a Fedora Firefox update with such change [3]. ma. [1] https://isc.sans.edu/diary/Flash+0-Day+Exploit+Used+by+Angler+Ex

Re: Flash plugin 0-day vulnerability in the wild

On 01/23/2015 10:51 AM, Martin Stransky wrote: Folk, There's a live 0-day flash vulnerability which is not fixed yet [1][2]. If you use flash plugin I recommend you to enable the click-to-play mode for it. There's also a Fedora Firefox update with such change [3]. ma.

Re: Flash plugin 0-day vulnerability in the wild

On 01/26/2015 01:48 PM, drago01 wrote: On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Martin Stransky wrote: On 01/23/2015 10:51 AM, Martin Stransky wrote: Folk, There's a live 0-day flash vulnerability which is not fixed yet [1][2]. If you use flash plugin I recommend you to enable the click-to

Re: Flash plugin 0-day vulnerability in the wild

On 01/26/2015 02:12 PM, Ahmad Samir wrote: On 26 January 2015 at 15:03, drago01 wrote: On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 2:01 PM, Ahmad Samir wrote: On 26 January 2015 at 14:55, Martin Stransky wrote: Where have you got that? Official Adobe site [1] says the latest is 11.2.202.438 and flash

Re: Flash plugin 0-day vulnerability in the wild

On 01/26/2015 02:03 PM, drago01 wrote: On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 2:01 PM, Ahmad Samir wrote: On 26 January 2015 at 14:55, Martin Stransky wrote: Where have you got that? Official Adobe site [1] says the latest is 11.2.202.438 and flash download page [2] gives me the same. I see the Ubuntu

Firefox 52 - ALSA backend disabled

Hi, ALSA backend is no longer available in official Fedora Firefox builds [1] since it has been deprecated by Mozilla and no longer maintained [2]. If you still want to use ALSA on Fedora builds, you just need to rebuild Firefox with such option. Just set "alsa_backend" to 1 and run the build

Re: Firefox 52.0.1: CVE-2017-5428

On 03/22/2017 01:22 AM, Bojan Smojver wrote: Does anyone know whether the fix for this problem is already in F25 builds of FF or should a new build be prepared and pushed to fix this? See: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1433819 Sorry I overlooked this one. Builds are in koji now,

Retired package - xulrunner

Hello, Xulrunner is no longer supported by upstream and contains known security bugs so we decided to retire it from master (will be still available for Fedora 26). If any project needs that package it has to bundle it. ma. ___ devel mailing list -

Re: really stop "really" commits (really!)

On 12/15/2013 12:01 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 06:42:11PM -0700, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote: To prevent this from happening in the future, I wrote a little git pre-commit hook to help out, which I figured I'd share with you all: http://patches.fedorapeople.org/patchcheck

Re: really stop "really" commits (really!)

On 12/16/2013 09:47 AM, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote: On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 1:11 AM, Martin Stransky wrote: There are some cases when we need it (sources taken as a snapshot from git/cvs) Huh? The sources have to be either in git or in the lookaside cache for koji to find them later. I'

Firefox Gtk3 test package

Hi guys, first $SUBJ is available at: http://stransky.fedorapeople.org/FirefoxGtk3/ It's just a src.spm and plugin support it not finished (don't browse youtube ;-)) but may work as a preview. I'll provide Fedora builds and repo later. ma. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Firefox Gtk3 test package

On 01/13/2014 04:29 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 10:15 AM, Martin Stransky wrote: Hi guys, first $SUBJ is available at: http://stransky.fedorapeople.org/FirefoxGtk3/ It's just a src.spm and plugin support it not finished (don't browse youtube ;-)) but may work as

Re: Firefox Gtk3 test package

On 01/13/2014 04:41 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: I don't say it's important/newsworthy. It's just FYI. Please ignore if you're not interested. Ok, I'll rephrase. I'm interested but I have no idea how this is different from every other Firefox build that Fedora provides. Could you elaborate on the ch

Re: Firefox Gtk3 test package

On 01/13/2014 04:48 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 13.01.2014 16:41, schrieb Josh Boyer: On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 10:39 AM, Martin Stransky wrote: On 01/13/2014 04:29 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 10:15 AM, Martin Stransky wrote: Hi guys, first $SUBJ is available at: http

Re: Firefox Gtk3 test package

On 01/13/2014 04:55 PM, Frank Murphy wrote: On Mon, 13 Jan 2014 16:49:09 +0100 Martin Stransky wrote: Ahh, Okay. The package is build with Gtk3 toolkit [1] (the recent official ones are Gtk2) so it's a regular Gtk3 app which should better fit to Gnome 3 desktop, use themes/skins and so.

Re: Firefox Gtk3 test package

On 01/13/2014 05:57 PM, Peter Robinson wrote: On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 3:49 PM, Martin Stransky wrote: On 01/13/2014 04:41 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: I don't say it's important/newsworthy. It's just FYI. Please ignore if you're not interested. Ok, I'll rephrase. I&#

Re: Firefox Gtk3 test package

On 01/13/2014 09:04 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 13.01.2014 20:50, schrieb Martin Stransky: On 01/13/2014 05:57 PM, Peter Robinson wrote: On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 3:49 PM, Martin Stransky wrote: On 01/13/2014 04:41 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: I don't say it's important/newsworthy. It&

Re: Firefox Gtk3 test package

On 01/13/2014 09:33 PM, Peter Robinson wrote: [...] It's the same as the gtk2 package, gstreamer support does not depend on toolkit. IIRC the test package has gstreamer enabled as well as the latest official Fedora Firefox builds. It was said in bug [1] comment 9 that it wouldn't be enabled un

Re: Firefox Gtk3 test package

On 01/13/2014 04:16 PM, Christopher Meng wrote: On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 11:15 PM, Martin Stransky wrote: Hi guys, first $SUBJ is available at: http://stransky.fedorapeople.org/FirefoxGtk3/ It's just a src.spm and plugin support it not finished (don't browse youtube ;-)) but may

Re: Firefox Gtk3 test package

ansky/FirefoxGtk3/ On 01/13/2014 04:15 PM, Martin Stransky wrote: Hi guys, first $SUBJ is available at: http://stransky.fedorapeople.org/FirefoxGtk3/ It's just a src.spm and plugin support it not finished (don't browse youtube ;-)) but may work as a preview. I'll provide Fedora b

Re: Firefox Gtk3 test package

On 01/14/2014 06:31 PM, Peter Robinson wrote: Is it possible to split the NSAPI components out into a sub package and hence remove the dependence on gtk2 for those people that don't use NSAPI plugins? You can build your own package at copr. We can add some config flags to firefox spec to make

Re: Firefox Gtk3 test package

On 01/14/2014 07:12 PM, Maros Zatko wrote: On 01/14/2014 03:38 PM, H. Guémar wrote: What's the point ? Personally, it's mainly about not throwing gnome 3 HIG at people. There's absolutely no benefit in keeping Gtk+2 longer. Gtk+ 2.24.0 has been released 3 years ago (january, 2011) and is only

Re: Firefox Gtk3 test package

On 01/14/2014 08:18 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 14.01.2014 19:12, schrieb Maros Zatko: On 01/14/2014 03:38 PM, H. Guémar wrote: What's the point ? Personally, it's mainly about not throwing gnome 3 HIG at people personally if a GTK user does not want GTK3 i want a pure QT firefox to get ri

Re: Firefox Gtk3 test package

On 01/16/2014 01:04 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 16.01.2014 12:56, schrieb Martin Stransky: On 01/14/2014 08:18 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 14.01.2014 19:12, schrieb Maros Zatko: On 01/14/2014 03:38 PM, H. Guémar wrote: What's the point ? Personally, it's mainly about not throwi

Re: Firefox Gtk3 test package

On 01/16/2014 08:19 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote: On Qui, 2014-01-16 at 12:47 +0100, Martin Stransky wrote: New builds are available at copr [1]. Package firefox-gtk3-29.0-3 contains working NPAPI plugin support, so flash and other should work there. Please report any issue to bugzila (firefox

Re: Firefox Gtk3 test package

On 01/28/2014 10:59 AM, Maros Zatko wrote: On 01/16/2014 12:54 PM, Martin Stransky wrote: On 01/14/2014 07:12 PM, Maros Zatko wrote: On 01/14/2014 03:38 PM, H. Guémar wrote: What's the point ? Personally, it's mainly about not throwing gnome 3 HIG at people. There's absolutel

Re: Firefox 49.0.2

Thanks for pointing it here, I miss that minor update. Btw. a new #BZ at bugzilla.redhat.com would work even better. There are two security bugs marked as "High" which means "Moderate" in Fedora terms. The big ones has "Critical" rating and there's none fixed in this release. AFAIK the main

  1   2   >